AMD Radeon HD 6950 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX130 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it shows a narrow but clear advantage for the AMD Radeon HD 6950. The AMD card scores 6210 points against 6102 for the NVIDIA GeForce MX130, a margin of 1.8 percent. That is a slim lead, but it is a lead nonetheless, and the database records exactly one win for the AMD part and none for the NVIDIA part in this head-to-head.

Context matters here. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 sits at the 36th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 sits at the 32nd percentile. The gap in percentile ranking is small, which matches the narrow score differential. Looking at the nearest rivals for the AMD card, it trails the AMD FirePro W600 by just 0.2 percent (6223 points), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 by 0.9 percent (6270 points), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER by the same 0.9 percent (6270 points). It also sits 1.1 percent behind the NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282 points). In other words, the HD 6950 is clustered tightly with a group of much newer and much more expensive cards, at least in this single OpenCL workload.

For the NVIDIA GeForce MX130, the nearest rivals tell a different story. It is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M, which scores 5501 points, a delta of just 0.1 percent. The AMD Radeon R7 M440 is 0.5 percent behind at 5483 points, the AMD FirePro M4000 is 0.5 percent ahead at 5537 points, and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 is 0.7 percent behind at 5467 points. The MX130's average benchmark score across all tests is 5508, which is notably lower than its OpenCL score alone, because it also has a Geekbench Vulkan result of 4914 points in the database. That Vulkan score drags the average down, and it suggests the MX130 is not particularly strong in compute-oriented workloads beyond OpenCL.

The headline result is that the older, desktop-class AMD card beats the newer, mobile-oriented NVIDIA chip by a small but measurable amount in OpenCL compute. The HD 6950's 1.8 percent advantage is not transformative, but it is consistent with the percentile data, where the AMD card ranks four points higher. For anyone choosing between these two strictly on compute performance, the data points one way.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras and different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 uses the Cayman chip, built on TeraScale 3 architecture, and belongs to the Northern Islands generation (HD 6900 series). It is fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC, with a massive 2,640 million transistors spread across a 389 mm² die. The transistor density is 6.8 million per square millimeter, which is low by modern standards but reflects the large, power-hungry design of that generation.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX130, by contrast, uses the GM108S chip, built on Maxwell architecture, and belongs to the GeForce MX (1xx) generation. It is fabricated on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, but with only 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. That gives it a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter, nearly double the AMD part. The MX130 is a small, efficient chip designed for thin-and-light laptops, while the HD 6950 is a large, dual-slot desktop card.

The compute resources differ enormously. The HD 6950 packs 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The MX130 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That is a 3.7x advantage in shaders, a 3.7x advantage in TMUs, and a 4x advantage in ROPs for the AMD card. The pixel rate for the HD 6950 is 25.60 GPixel/s versus 9.512 GPixel/s for the MX130, and the texture rate is 70.40 GTexel/s versus 28.54 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute is 2.253 TFLOPS for the AMD card versus 913.2 GFLOPS for the NVIDIA chip, a ratio of roughly 2.5 to 1.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. Both cards have 2 GB of GDDR5, but the HD 6950 uses a 256-bit bus delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the MX130 uses a 64-bit bus delivering just 40.10 GB/s. That is a 4x difference in memory bandwidth, which matters for texture-heavy workloads and higher resolutions. The memory clock is similar on paper, 1250 MHz for the AMD card and 1253 MHz for the NVIDIA card, both rated at 5 Gbps effective, but the wider bus makes the real-world bandwidth gap enormous.

The power envelope is where the MX130 fights back. The HD 6950 has a TDP of 200 W, requires two 6-pin power connectors, and needs a 550 W power supply. The MX130 has a TDP of just 30 W, uses no external power connectors, and is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) in terms of slot width. The MX130 is also a PCIe 3.0 x4 device, while the HD 6950 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The AMD card is 286 mm long, 126 mm tall, and 42 mm wide, while the MX130 has no recorded dimensions because it is designed for portable devices.

Architecturally, the AMD card supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4, but has no Vulkan support listed. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. That is a significant feature gap: the MX130 supports modern graphics APIs that the HD 6950 cannot. The MX130 also has base and boost clocks of 1109 MHz and 1189 MHz respectively, while the HD 6950 has no base or boost clock listed, only its memory clock.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 scores 6210 points in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 1.8 percent higher than the NVIDIA GeForce MX130's 6102 points.

Q: How do the two compare in terms of transistor count and die size?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 has 2,640 million transistors on a 389 mm² die, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 has 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The MX130 has a higher transistor density at 13.2M per mm² versus 6.8M per mm².

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 delivers 160.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 delivers 40.10 GB/s over a 64-bit bus. That is a 4x difference in bandwidth.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the MX130 lists Vulkan 1.4 support, along with DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 lists DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4 but has no Vulkan support recorded.

Q: Which GPU has a higher TDP?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 has a TDP of 200 W and requires two 6-pin power connectors, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 has a TDP of 30 W and uses no external power connectors.

Q: What are the percentile rankings for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 is at the 36th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 is at the 32nd percentile.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The process node is 40 nm for the AMD part versus 28 nm for the NVIDIA part. Transistor count is 2,640 million versus 1,020 million, and die size is 389 mm² versus 77 mm². Transistor density is 6.8M per mm² for AMD versus 13.2M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds differ as well. The AMD card has no base or boost clock recorded, only a memory clock of 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA card has a base clock of 1109 MHz, a boost clock of 1189 MHz, and a memory clock of 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Memory bus width is 256-bit for the AMD card versus 64-bit for the NVIDIA card. Bandwidth is 160.0 GB/s versus 40.10 GB/s. Both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, but that is where the similarity ends.

Compute units are starkly different: 1408 shading units versus 384, 88 TMUs versus 24, and 32 ROPs versus 8. Pixel rate is 25.60 GPixel/s versus 9.512 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 70.40 GTexel/s versus 28.54 GTexel/s. FP32 is 2.253 TFLOPS versus 913.2 GFLOPS.

Power requirements are 200 W versus 30 W. The AMD card is dual-slot with two 6-pin connectors and a 550 W suggested PSU, while the NVIDIA card is listed as IGP with no connectors and no suggested PSU. The bus interface is PCIe 2.0 x16 for AMD versus PCIe 3.0 x4 for NVIDIA.

API support differs: DirectX 11.2 (11_0) versus DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.4 versus 4.6, and no Vulkan versus Vulkan 1.4. The AMD card has specific display outputs (2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2), while the NVIDIA card has "Portable Device Dependent" outputs. Dimensions are 286 mm x 126 mm x 42 mm for AMD, with no dimensions recorded for NVIDIA.

Release dates are far apart: the AMD card launched on 2010-12-13, while the NVIDIA card launched on 2017-11-16. The AMD card has a recorded launch MSRP of 299 USD, while the NVIDIA card has no launch MSRP. Both are end-of-life products.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two GPUs by use case rather than by raw score. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 wins the only head-to-head benchmark, posting a 1.8 percent higher OpenCL score than the NVIDIA GeForce MX130. It also holds a higher percentile ranking, 36th versus 32nd. For anyone running OpenCL compute workloads on a desktop system with adequate power delivery, the HD 6950 is the stronger choice based on the recorded measurements.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX130, however, offers capabilities the AMD card simply does not have. It supports DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the HD 6950 is limited to DirectX 11.2 and OpenGL 4.4. That makes the MX130 the only viable option for modern graphics APIs in the database. It also consumes just 30 W versus 200 W, requires no external power connectors, and is designed for portable devices where the HD 6950's 286 mm length and dual-slot footprint would be impossible.

The compute gap is real but small. The HD 6950's 2.253 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is roughly 2.5 times the MX130's 913.2 GFLOPS, and its memory bandwidth advantage is 4x. Those are substantial architectural differences, but they do not translate into a massive OpenCL score lead because the benchmark result is only 1.8 percent apart. The MX130's efficiency, modern API support, and smaller physical footprint make it the sensible pick for mobile systems or low-power builds. The HD 6950 is the pick for raw compute throughput on a desktop where power and space are not constraints.

In short, the AMD Radeon HD 6950 wins the performance comparison in the database, but the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 wins the compatibility and efficiency comparison. The choice depends entirely on the target system and workload.